It's been nearly two years since Google first announced its plans to acquire Motorola Mobility—ostensibly for its patent portfolio—and just a bit over a year since the acquisition was finalized. For all that, it still feels like we're waiting to see what Google plans to do with the company, aside from laying off its employees and posting financial losses. Google's Chief Financial Officer Patrick Pichette even went on the record in February to say that Motorola's products lacked "innovative, transformative" qualities, and that Google was still working through the company's pre-acquisition hardware pipeline (we may have seen some of those devices this morning at Verizon's Droid event in fact).

By all indications, that's finally about to change. Rumors about a coming "X Phone," later dubbed the Moto X, have been building since late last year. Eric Schmidt himself has been spotted carrying one around already. Motorola's logo has even been changed to incorporate Google's flatter, simpler aesthetics and to include a Google logo. These changes indicate that Google is finally taking ownership of Motorola in spirit as well as on paper.

If Google's past statements are any indication, the Moto X represents the dawn of a new era for Motorola, one that will see its sprawling and convoluted product line boiled down to just a few handsets. Let's talk about what we know about the (much-leaked) Moto X and what future advancements it may be heralding.

The specs: Distinctly Droid-like

We've known exactly what the phone looks like and what's inside it for weeks now. By all accounts, the Moto X looks like a nice but decidedly midrange smartphone.

These are the specs that are currently flying around, most of which have been confirmed by credible leaks and FCC documents: it has a dual-core Qualcomm Snapdragon system-on-a-chip (part number MSM8960DT) running at 1.7GHz, and those CPU cores are paired with an Adreno 320 GPU. This is the same "eight core" chip used in the latest run of Droid phones, and it will likely be marketed as the "Motorola X8" rather than the Snapdragon chip it truly is. For reference, this SoC should give the phone CPU performance slightly higher than last year's Samsung Galaxy S III and GPU performance roughly equivalent to something like the Nexus 4 or the original LG Optimus G. Also included is 2GB of RAM, typical in mid-to-high-end Android phones these days.

Most rumors point to the phone having a 4.7-inch screen. Many publications have reported its resolution as 1184×720 based on leaked screenshots of Android system reporting apps, but these apps commonly mis-report true display resolution because they exclude the pixels consumed by Android's software navigation buttons. I'll eat my hat if this isn't a run-of-the-mill 1280×720 display, which at 4.7 inches would have 312 pixels per inch.

These apps regularly miscalculate the screen resolution on phones and tablets with software navigation buttons.

These specs are roughly in line with the just-announced Droid Ultra and Droid Maxx. Also like the newest Droids, the Moto X is expected to have a 10 megapixel rear camera and two megapixel front camera. It reportedly has a 2,200mAh battery that's similar to the 2,130mAh one in the Droid Ultra (but not the longer-lasting Droid Maxx).

All of this is to say that, at least on the inside, the new Droids and the Moto X share much of the same DNA (no, notthat Droid DNA). This only makes sense for Google and Motorola—buying fewer parts in higher volumes should get them price breaks from their suppliers, and it also reduces software complexity for their developers. The phone's SoC isn't the fastest on the block, but it's still more than quick enough to run Android 4.2.2 (no Android 4.3 yet, unless Google announces a surprise tomorrow) and all of Android's many apps and games.

What makes it unique?

Enlarge/ The Moto X is said to run a mostly stock version of Android, with some notable additions (including an improved camera app, pictured here).

This is the real question we're waiting on Google to answer. If I want a high-end or midrange Android phone, I have plenty of places to turn, including Google itself. Why the buzz about the Moto X specifically? What will make this the "Google phone" that pundits have been prophesying since Google bought Motorola?

For starters, the phone's version of Android will reportedly be near-stock. Most phone manufacturers put a skin on Android to help differentiate their high-end hardware from the next OEM's, but so few of these devices actually offer a stock or near-stock experience that going with Google's version of the UI is actually a compelling differentiator. That said, some of stock-Android's biggest shortcomings (the camera app, in particular) should be addressed. Whether those upgrades will eventually make their way back into stock Android is a discussion for another day, one where we have a better idea how Motorola fits into Google's Grand Vision for us.

The phone will also be distinctly Google-y, if the current scuttlebutt is to be believed. In addition to the Google apps and services that already come with Android devices, the Moto X will supposedly include Google Glass-style voice commands, though some rumors suggest those will be off by default to allay privacy concerns. As demonstrated by Siri and S Voice, talking to your phone isn't exactly the hot new thing it was in 2011, though if done well it could at least help distinguish the phone from its cousins.

Enlarge/ A leaked photographic representation of the Moto X's many layers.

The hardware itself will supposedly include some small but noteworthy innovations. Something called "Moto Magic Glass" will apparently allow the phone's Gorilla Glass face to wrap around the edges of the device, joining seamlessly with its aluminum back panel. The phone is also said to include dedicated 4G LTE antennas instead of using the same antennas to connect to 2G, 3G, and LTE networks. Lastly, much has been made about the phone's switchable, multi-colored backs, and Google itself has gone on the record to say that the phone will be made in the USA. The phone's country of manufacture isn't going to change what it's like to hold and use the phone, but it might make a difference if you're bothered by the stories about the factory conditions in which many other consumer electronics are made.

Finally, there has been some speculation based on "sources" that Google will choose to differentiate their phone using price, selling them at a Nexus-esque $299 and $349 off-contract. That would be a great deal given that off-contract phones from most OEMs regularly sell for about twice that. While excellent if true, the unfortunate reality is that Google's various partnerships might keep that from happening. Selling Nexus devices for developers and enthusiasts is one thing, but selling a mid-to-high-end handset for $299 when your partners are selling similar phones for $600, and your carriers are trying to make people sign up for accelerated phone replacement programs, sounds like it's asking for trouble. The fact that the Droid Ultra and Droid Maxx were just announced at $199 and $299 on-contract also makes us doubt the veracity of these rumors, but never say never.

Google's big event takes place tomorrow, and we'll be on the ground collecting more facts and photos as Google doles them out. We're hoping for something big—let's hope that Google and Motorola can deliver.

Am I missing something or is that article about Samsung and this one about Google/Motorola? Good grief!

Anyways, I'm kinda disappointed with the Motorola X, seeing as it is just going to be a gsm unlocked droid. Why a 720p screen mid-2013? When the next nexus 4(5?) will most likely be 1080p. I don't see any Motorola 'flagship' phone. All these droids are mid-range and the only slightly compelling thing about the X is the price (which is again unimpressive cos it matches the nexus 4 which came out last year). I hope I'll get a surprise tomorrow because if all these rumors hold......pass!

With the recent unveiling by AnandTech of the Nexus 7 (2013) carrying an underclocked Snapdragon 600, I sure do hope it is the same with the Moto X with a dual-core Snapdragon 600 and a MSM8960DT monicker as compared to the MSM8960T of the Snapdragon S4 Pro.

I don't think I can take the suspense any more. Release it already!

Samunosuke wrote:

Anyways, I'm kinda disappointed with the Motorola X, seeing as it is just going to be a gsm unlocked droid. Why a 720p screen mid-2013? When the next nexus 4(5?) will most likely be 1080p. I don't see any Motorola 'flagship' phone. All these droids are mid-range and the only slightly compelling thing about the X is the price (which is again unimpressive cos it matches the nexus 4 which came out last year). I hope I'll get a surprise tomorrow because if all these rumors hold......pass!

I reckon the aim of Moto X as a product is to make smartphones more affordable, hence more accessible to end users. Not everyone wants a flashy, feature-filled and an expensive smartphone and for them, this ought to be perfect.

Motorola, and in extension Google, might be wanting to show that it isn't the core count, the screen resolution or the megapixels that make a good smartphone, but rather, the experience it provides. Back to basics, in a way.

But if you had your heart set on a high-end phone unveil, this might not be the droid you're looking for.

Anyways, I'm kinda disappointed with the Motorola X, seeing as it is just going to be a gsm unlocked droid. Why a 720p screen mid-2013? When the next nexus 4(5?) will most likely be 1080p. I don't see any Motorola 'flagship' phone. All these droids are mid-range and the only slightly compelling thing about the X is the price (which is again unimpressive cos it matches the nexus 4 which came out last year). I hope I'll get a surprise tomorrow because if all these rumors hold......pass!

Hint: the Droid brand belongs to Verizon.

As for the nexus 4, it doesn't have official LTE support and doesn't have the voice recognition features OOTB the Moto X has.

I wasn't particularly interested in the Moto X until some pics revealed its going to be a relatively narrow device at around 65mm. This makes one-handed use much easier, so I'm looking forward to the announcement tomorrow.

Price is going to be a huge factor on this thing. If it really is $300, it'll be a huge hit. If they are going to try and price it up with the HTC One and Samsung S4, it'll be DOA.

The price almost certainly has to come in below the HTC Google Play edition. That's a "pure" Google experience with better specs. Google tends to price more aggressively than that. Also, I think Google's point with Motorola is to force their "partners" to compete. It's in there best interest to move more phones rather than help their partners be more profitable. They price aggressively with their Nexus devices, why not with Motorola? The Nexus 7 certainly isn't a "developer reference" sale. It's a mass market play.

I can't see Google dumping $500MM into marketing unless they thought that they were going to sell a lot of these things. They aren't going to sell a lot without a very attractive price.

Edit: Then again, the new Droid Ultra looks to be almost the exact same phone as the Moto X and is $200 with contract. Hard to see them sell off contract for $300 and on contract for just $100 cheaper.

but selling a mid-to-high-end handset for $299 when your partners are selling similar phones for $600 and your carriers are trying to make people sign up for accelerated phone replacement programs sounds like it's asking for trouble. The fact that the Droid Ultra and Droid Maxx were just announced at $199 and $299 on-contract also makes us doubt the veracity of these rumors, but never say never.

When I had to get a pair of Galaxy Nexus phones for work, they were like $249 on the Google Play Store. (I can't remember exactly, it was a long time ago) My boss needed them ASAP, so I went to some local places and found that Verizon wanted $549 for the Galaxy Nexus off contract. I don't know who in their right mind would pay Verizon that for an off-contract Galaxy Nexus, when you could've gotten it way cheaper on the Google Play Store...

So with that being said, I would take Verizon's pricing of the Moto X with a grain of salt when it comes to trying to extrapolate what it would cost straight from the Google Play Store...

I remember when Google first started android they talked about a mythical $99 phone that people bought off contract as a semi disposable item. Google or preferably hardware partners would sell the phones directly to customers and carriers would be reduced to just providing data plans for the devices.

The market did not really work out like that "status" phones have ruled for the past few years. The price of the status phones was too high for customers to buy direct, so carriers became involved to finance them in with the phone plan. This created 2 parties, the phone manufacturer and the carrier, between Google and the customer. A difficult situation to successfully manage.

If they decide to sell this phone at cost direct to customers, they are going to make trouble for themselves. The price at around $300 is still too high to tempt most customers directly. The android partners will all be upset as it is subsidized competition(by ad revenues) from their operating system partner. At $300 the carriers will inevitably be involved to finance the purchases and thus can also limit Google's access to the customer(ie stop Google voice or other free voice services).

Motorola is now well out of top 10 phone manufacturers, less than 2 million units per quarter supposedly, will need to double their sales at least to get back into bottom of top 10. Probably is better for them to abandon selling mass market devices directly and instead concentrate on experimental type devices. This would help them accumulate patents, needed for protection into the future, Also maybe concentrate on innovations to get the price of a handset down to the $100 range so that can take away some of the control that the carriers have at the moment.

but selling a mid-to-high-end handset for $299 when your partners are selling similar phones for $600 and your carriers are trying to make people sign up for accelerated phone replacement programs sounds like it's asking for trouble. The fact that the Droid Ultra and Droid Maxx were just announced at $199 and $299 on-contract also makes us doubt the veracity of these rumors, but never say never.

When I had to get a pair of Galaxy Nexus phones for work, they were like $249 on the Google Play Store. (I can't remember exactly, it was a long time ago) My boss needed them ASAP, so I went to some local places and found that Verizon wanted $549 for the Galaxy Nexus off contract. I don't know who in their right mind would pay Verizon that for an off-contract Galaxy Nexus, when you could've gotten it way cheaper on the Google Play Store...

So with that being said, I would take Verizon's pricing of the Moto X with a grain of salt when it comes to trying to extrapolate what it would cost straight from the Google Play Store...

This is certainly one of the reasons that I am going to either buy the Moto X or the Nexus 4 tomorrow, unlocked, and leave Verizon for T-Mobile.

Why a 720p screen mid-2013? When the next nexus 4(5?) will most likely be 1080p.

1080p is still uncommon, and only one phone (the HTC One) squeezes that resolution into a 4.7" screen. So I think your expectations have risen too fast, especially for a phone that isn't meant to sell in the $600-$650 price range. It has 2GB of RAM, which is probably the most important spec for performance these days. We'll see how it does with its camera (previously a weak point for Motorola phones) and its dual core processor. I suspect the 8X won't live up to the hype.

But I'm not interested in a 4.7" phone. Too wide, no matter how well they control the bezel. I don't see any great advantages in keeping the OS close to stock, and I have no intention of talking to my phone a lot. I don't think it'll be just $300, either. It'll probably be a good phone, but no more than that.

I'm not sure this is a mid range device. Given the benchmarks we've seen it must be running krait 300 cores. The camera is supposed to be particularly good at low light (we'll see about that tomorrow).The benchmarks have placed it between the HTC one and gs4. To get there I'd imagine they're using fast RAM and storage.

I guess if you really are determined to get stock android this is a good phone for you but maybe I just don't understand the fascination with stock android there are many other phones to choose from. For full disclosure I'm stuck with verizon if I want any type of reception so buying it off contract doesn't help me.

The early NYT article saying it'd be priced to compete with the S4 and One

Assembled in USA

The Nexus Q debacle

Google wanting to get Moto out of the red

They could probably get away with $400.

On another note, if it ships with 4.2, the 4.3 update will be a good early test of the New Motorola's dedication. Everyone assumes there'll be quick updates now that Google owns the company, but Google's public statements have always downplayed or dismissed fragmentation as an issue. Soon we'll get to see if that was just spin, or what they actually believe.

I'm not sure this is a mid range device. Given the benchmarks we've seen it must be running krait 300 cores. The camera is supposed to be particularly good at low light (we'll see about that tomorrow).The benchmarks have placed it between the HTC one and gs4. To get there I'd imagine they're using fast RAM and storage.

Mid-range, high-end, low-end are marketing segmentation terms, not technical terms. They are based on trying to provide one set of devices which people with money will buy, no matter what the price, while simultaneously providing an "adequate" device which people with less money will also buy.

In the past this sort of segmentation fairly easily matched technical specs simply because the tech was improving in user tangible ways so rapidly. This has ended with PCs --- look at the bizarre contortions Intel goes through to market segmentation its CPUs --- and it's coming close to an end with phones.

In other words the difference between a high-end phone and a mid-range phone is NOT that one is 100% faster than the other, has next gen wireless, has a high-dpi screen, etc --- those days are over. The difference now is things like the high-end phones LOOKs high-end --- it has metal and glass everywhere, joined together beautifully. The buttons are aligned perfectly. etc etc. The mid-range phone has the same guts (maybe running at 10% slower, and missing a few features) but it just doesn't look as cool. For another example of this, compare everything we've seen rumored about the cheaper iPhone 5 vs the current iPhone. Or compare what's the difference between a Lexus and a Toyota...

To claim that the superficial tech specs are close to competitors and therefore this MUST be a high-end machine is to be living in the past. Phones post 2013 are in a different world from from phones from 2007 to 20013.

That would be a great deal given that off-contract phones from most OEMs regularly sell for about twice that. While excellent if true, the unfortunate reality is that Google's various partnerships might keep that from happening. Selling Nexus devices for developers and enthusiasts is one thing, but selling a mid-to-high-end handset for $299 when your partners are selling similar phones for $600 and your carriers are trying to make people sign up for accelerated phone replacement programs sounds like it's asking for trouble.

Hardware-wise, the Nexus 4 is a Optimus G with a different body and camera, otherwise same processor, same chipset, same screen and resolution, same battery. Only the Optimus G cost twice as much, despite being released in the same month, and had a better camera and more storage. Why not do it again?

Am I missing something or is that article about Samsung and this one about Google/Motorola? Good grief!

Anyways, I'm kinda disappointed with the Motorola X, seeing as it is just going to be a gsm unlocked droid. Why a 720p screen mid-2013? When the next nexus 4(5?) will most likely be 1080p. I don't see any Motorola 'flagship' phone. All these droids are mid-range and the only slightly compelling thing about the X is the price (which is again unimpressive cos it matches the nexus 4 which came out last year). I hope I'll get a surprise tomorrow because if all these rumors hold......pass!

Anyways, I'm kinda disappointed with the Motorola X, seeing as it is just going to be a gsm unlocked droid. Why a 720p screen mid-2013? When the next nexus 4(5?) will most likely be 1080p. I don't see any Motorola 'flagship' phone. All these droids are mid-range and the only slightly compelling thing about the X is the price (which is again unimpressive cos it matches the nexus 4 which came out last year). I hope I'll get a surprise tomorrow because if all these rumors hold......pass!

The reasons I find the Moto X radically more desirable than the Nexus 4:1) The Moto X is significantly smaller (if leaks are true), despite having the same size screen as the N4 (yes, .1" narrower and .25" shorter is significant).2) The glass back on the N4 was a turn-off for me, both aesthetically (sparkles!) and with respect to durability. I'm very happy they decided to go polymer and aluminum with the Moto X.3) 2200 mah battery in the Moto X vs 2100 mah in the N4.

Of course, none of that will matter if they price it at $600. But if it's the same price as the N4, that is a great list of improvements for a device that is only 9 months newer. As far as I know, this is the smallest phone ever released with a 4.7" screen, and that's a big deal to some of us.

It will apparently be certain to have a 4.7" screen, though the overall footprint is smaller than the Droid RAZR. So it will be physically smaller than that 4.3" phone, but with a larger, higher resolution screen, better performance, new capabilities, and all the other blathering you're heard.

I'm very excited to see if it comes in at less than $450 for a 32gb model. If that happens, I am purchasing this ASAP.

I guess if you really are determined to get stock android this is a good phone for you but maybe I just don't understand the fascination with stock android there are many other phones to choose from. For full disclosure I'm stuck with verizon if I want any type of reception so buying it off contract doesn't help me.

It's because sometimes the OEMs fsck up the UX. HTC, has a nice skin, but they have neglected to port certificate authentication support into Sense Mail, which has been a standard feature of AOSP since ICS. That means if your enterprise requires certificate authentication, none of HTC's phones will work for you without modding your phone to use the stock mail/exchange app. They also screwed up the calendar, so that if you are emailed a calendar invite, and you tap on "show in calendar", it shows you TODAY's view, instead of the day OF THE APPOINTMENT. That was easier to remedy, because you can just install the stock calendar from Google Play... Now HTC may have fixed the calendar for Sense 5, (it was broken on Sense 4) as I haven't used it... But I know certificate authentication is still missing on Sense 5.

Samsung.... For some unknown reason, they are still putting a capacitive menu button on their phones, which not only breaks design guidelines for ICS and newer, it provides a terrible user experience. If I'm running an app, I haven't the foggiest idea if a menu is implemented in the app until I blindly tap the menu button. If nothing happens, I haven't the foggiest if it's because no menu was implemented, my touch wasn't registered, or the app is locked up. Rinse and repeat for every UI screen of the app...

If they followed design guidelines, and left out the menu button, then the soft menu button would only be rendered when an actual menu is implemented by the current activity.

The only reason the "black bar" shows up on some apps, is because the app developer was a moron and doesn't know the proper use of MinSDK and TargetSDK on the build environment, and probably set MinSDK and TargetSDK to be the same value, most likely API 8 or 9 (Froyo or Gingerbread) Google even talked about this very issue at last year's Google I/O.

The combination of processors and custom firmware extends battery life and improves performance, Arshad said.

"If we did not have the contextual computing processor and our natural language processor in place, we would need two additional batteries," he said. The X8 also performs 50 percent better than "our competition" on gaming battery rundown benchmarks and can push higher graphics frame rates, he said.

I haven't checked if this pans out in reviews of the new Droids though.

I find it disappointing that Motorola have decided to mess around with the UI for three reasons:

(1) Stock Android is good enough as it is.

(2) Future updates are going to be delayed as Motorola has to crowbar in all their modifications.

(3) Historically Motorola have been extremely weak when it comes to both UI and UX. In recent years they've shown no indication that they've gotten any better at either.

I remember Google canning a number of Motorola devices because they weren't "exciting enough", I'm not entirely sure what it is about this device that makes it exciting.

I suppose apart the fact that it adds another almost-but-not-quite stock Android device (alongside the developer editions of the HTC One and Galaxy S3) could count for something - but I'd rather something more "pure".

I find it disappointing that Motorola have decided to mess around with the UI for three reasons:

(1) Stock Android is good enough as it is.

(2) Future updates are going to be delayed as Motorola has to crowbar in all their modifications.

(3) Historically Motorola have been extremely weak when it comes to both UI and UX. In recent years they've shown no indication that they've gotten any better at either.

I remember Google canning a number of Motorola devices because they weren't "exciting enough", I'm not entirely sure what it is about this device that makes it exciting.

I suppose apart the fact that it adds another almost-but-not-quite stock Android device (alongside the developer editions of the HTC One and Galaxy S3) could count for something - but I'd rather something more "pure".

If they code their custom apps properly, they won't have to do anything to make them work with new Android versions. You have probably noticed how most, if not all, of your apps work fine after a system upgrade. The trick is to do all the customization through apps, not modifying the system itself. Most fail to do this.

It strikes me that the announcement is nothing to do with the Moto X being particularly ground-breaking/inventive/original etc, and more about using the Motorola brand to set a direction to the major Android licensees about what they consider to be a modern Android experience. OK, you can argue that the Nexus fulfils that particular niche, or the Google Play editions of the HTC One and SG4 etc, but those phones suffer from availability and price issues. You can't walk into a high street phone vendor and pick up a Nexus, and the high street versions of the special editions are cheaper and again available to pick up and touch.

Google needs a brand that is recognised globally, that has a mature penetration into existing sales channels to everyday phone shops without relying on internet only marketing which relies on people specifically choosing that device, rather than being able to choose it from amongst peers. Motorola is that brand, and the 'co-branding' of Google should only add some cachet to it.

I don't see them leading the race to produce the first handset to be able to make your tea and brush your teeth in the morning, I see them as pushing out competitive and desirable mid range Android phones with stock OS installs and using the official branding along with things like timely and consistent updates as a differentiating factor.

Too many people think Android just means "not an iPhone", the recent skin article shows that confusion reigns supreme and people often tell me they are going to get a "Galaxy" next for example, without understanding that they are just selecting a manufacturer, not an OS (or much less, a platform). New Moto phones should be the benchmark of user friendly Android devices that people want to use, not the benchmark of fake performance result, unwanted 'features', and general spec' baiting.

Andrew Cunningham / Andrew has a B.A. in Classics from Kenyon College and has over five years of experience in IT. His work has appeared on Charge Shot!!! and AnandTech, and he records a weekly book podcast called Overdue.